Jump to content
3DCoat Forums
Taros

Twitter discussion: What Andrew is currently doing.

Recommended Posts

little tests in ppp without using any conditons (just metalness/normal/glossiness )

Just seeing if I can match materials between Unreal4 and 3Dcoat.

 

(Im using a build that was laying around on the google drive for a week or so, the build was probably not meant for us and and is  very unfinished.I just downloaded out of curiosity... its really unfinished and release is probably gonna be soon anyway.Trust me guys you will have more fun with a more finished build)

 

post-1195-0-70790600-1415420062_thumb.jp

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will you please check your New Content Setup ?

 

ty

 

post-10142-0-50799600-1415463775_thumb.j

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, shouldn´t be the gloss a roghness or the metallicity a specularity?

This graph didn´t match the glossy/specular nor the metall/roughness PBR workflow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, shouldn´t be the gloss a roghness or the metallicity a specularity?

This graph didn´t match the glossy/specular nor the metall/roughness PBR workflow.

To quote Andrew:

Gloss and Roughness are generally equivalent (1-x) but making materials via gloss is more natural due to modulation of texture mask over gloss leads to more rough surface but modulation of texture over roughness leads to more shiny surface that is less natural for materials. Of course roughness may be exported

Most likely we will be painting with metalness and glossiness (inverted roughness channel), but it will be possible to export metalness/roughness or specularity/glossiness.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To quote Andrew:

Most likely we will be painting with metalness and glossiness (inverted roughness channel), but it will be possible to export metalness/roughness or specularity/glossiness.

 alsolutely wrong, but sure you can invert the gloss to use it as roughtness, but the result will be extremly different.

glossiness ≠ roughtness

and what make me the most confuse is that a screenshot of the shaer show two term that whould not cohabit together

or it metallic + roughtness

or it clossiness +specular color

it just can't to be  metallic + gloss that has a none sense !

Edited by fuzzzzzz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 alsolutely wrong, but sure you can invert the gloss to use it as roughtness, but the result will be extremly different.

glossiness ≠ roughtness

and what make me the most confuse is that a screenshot of the shaer show two term that whould not cohabit together

or it metallic + roughtness

or it clossiness +specular color

it just can't to be  metallic + gloss that has a none sense !

 

I agree im confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulba_bigger.png

PBR visual explanation -

B2FmizQIcAAuSFR.jpg

Yeah isn't the terminology supposed to be: metallic/roughness or specular/gloss? In the past there have been a lot of typos in the 3D-Coat software, so I am guessing that the "gloss" in the above image is supposed to be "roughness". It looks like the material that is top right is a smooth metallic material, and the material bottom left is a rough non-metallic material, so the image looks correct, just the wording is off?

Or maybe Andrew is making a non-standard kind of PBR here? It will be interesting to see what the maps look like for these materials, and hopefully they will look good in external render engines...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuzzzzzz of course it can be metalness/glossness...For example Marmoset toolbag 2 uses glossness instead of roughness .

It can totally be inverted and used as a roughness map as Andrew explained.Both Gloss/Roughness define microsurface...they are inversely equivalent.

.

Fuzzzzzz, here is exact instruction for PBR from Marmoset:

"For users experienced with modern game engines which use physically accurate shaders, there may be some slight differences in workflow. If you have content created for an engine that uses a Roughness Map, where dark values equal glossy surfaces and bright values equal rough surfaces, load your Roughness Map into the “Gloss Map” slot, but be sure to enable the “Invert” check box"

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i never use marmot set and will probably never use the app.

when i modeling and texture models its for game engine, not to shot a screen for my portfolio.

quixel worked this way and i after I bought my own licence , it was finally for nothing, so it seem that it will be the same with 3dcoat, if the roughtness is an invert gloss map i will for sure never use the pbr in 3dcoat.

the engine i target ie UE4, not marmot set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

urf, i can't to edit my own posts :/

So I rephrase, just forget the previous message :)

i had never use marmotset and will probably never use the app.
when I create models and textures, its for game engine, not to shot a screen for my portfolio. this app can handle the two workflows,reflectance en metalness mixing them doesn't mean it will give me the right visual aspect into my game engine.
Quixel worked this way and i after I bought my own licence , it was finally for nothing and become simply useless, because all glossmap from megascan are simply wrong.
you can invert the map but , you woulkd also have to clamp (min< >max) the gray scale between two values, and with that, it will not become a correct roughness map.

fortunaly all this depend on the database from the one you grab the material definitions. it could be megascan, or the materials preset in substance painter, and now the stamp brushes in 3dcoat.
if the material are calibrate for reflectance wrokflow i would simply not use 3dcoat with my ue4 game project, but substance looks perfectly calibrated for that engine.

if we want a perfect calibration of 3dcoat material to work only with marmort and cryengine
instead of target the metal ness worflow that will be more widely use by gameengine than reflectance that is just sopported by marmot and cryengine.
metalness workflow will be compatible with more engine, ue4, marmot( as it has metalness workflow) frostbyte engine and surely more and more.

Seems like Unity5 pbr is a new approcach that are not reflectance or metalness workflow.
According to Wes on allegorithmic forum
 

Unity 5 will be using a Spec/Gloss workflow for Unity 5. It is a derivative of Disney GGX BRDF.

They will be using some different terminology as to try and help bridge the gap from traditional map creation to PBR. For instance, they are using smoothness instead of glossiness or roughness. I feel this is not the best approach in terms of keeping true to the naming conventions already used in PBR workflows, but its not technically wrong either. PBR is more of a methodology rather than a standard. The map creation principles are the same and this provides the ability for PBR content to be authored in a consistent manner. I would have liked to see Unity use the same conventions as UE4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. @AndrewShpagin And just so people know, there is an option to invert gloss to get roughness at export.

    0 replies0 retweets0 favorites

     Reply

     Retweet

     Favorite

    More

  2. @JavisJones of course - roughness is one of export channels, so no worryness there.

    0 replies0 retweets0 favorites

     Reply

     Retweet

     Favorite

    More

  3. @AndrewShpagin Sounds great! People are going to love it. :)

    0 replies0 retweets0 favorites

     Reply

     Retweet

     Favorite

    More

  4. @AndrewShpagin When can I get my hands on it? I will be teaching texturing w/3D coat soon+would prefer to do it in PBR

    0 replies0 retweets0 favorites

     Reply

     Retweet

     Favorite

    More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a message from unreal engine developper to clarify the topic about gloss versus roughness :

 

The material model is based off of Disney's. I've had experience in the past with a physically based model that was DiffuseColor, SpecularColor, and Gloss. There is nothing more or less physical about it. It is just a different interface to the artist. In my experience there are things about it that are problematic that I intended to solve.

Gloss to some people isn't obvious in how it works. What does gloss mean? Although high gloss and low gloss are perfectly clear to me on more than one occasion there has been confusion or debate about which produces sharper or blurrier reflections. Roughness is clear to everyone. It is immediately understandable and clear as to what effect it has on light. The unfortunate thing is that it is opposite the intuitive intensity of specular reflectance. This means that roughness maps look inverted visually. For this reason some engines have gone with "smoothness" instead, which if I were to do it again I would strongly consider.

DiffuseColor and SpecularColor have a complex relationship that requires a great deal of artist training and is very error prone. Artists need to be taught that metals have black diffuse and colored specular, nonmetals have noncolored specular of about 4%. What is that in sRGB space? These sound simple but trust me, making sure the textures followed rules like this is a long and difficult process. Having the parameter Metallic is much simpler. Is this metallic, yes, no? Now there is nothing to learn or screw up except setting metallic to something not 0 or 1. The learning process with this material model I have seen go much better.

An additional advantage is storage savings. Materials can often assume constants and not require textures for Metallic or Specular. The GBuffer gains one channel by storing Metallic and Specular instead of SpecularColor.

There is a downside being that it disallows some nonphysical materials with diffuse and colored specular. Occasionally that can cause issues but most of the time this is a good thing.

There are many others going the metallic route, Frostbite and The Order come to mind. The Disney presentation made a really big splash.

 

Source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fuzzzzz do you have a twitter account ?

 

if yes you are welcome to add your opinion to this twiit 

 

will be good to share. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello Carlosan, i had just updated my signature on the forum so my twitter account is in it :)

to be honest twitter is great tool for lover and haters, but not to people with an argumentary ^^!

finally i took the time to answer :

https://twitter.com/AndrewShpagin/status/531818983331471360

Edited by fuzzzzzz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was expecting fights over the different approaches to pbr... it's going to be a nightmare if Andrew doesn't build modules to get things moving as the standards are "established" and new approach are born... GL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, is saw it

 

ty fuzzzzzz very much  :thank_you:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any information about the lighting system ?

 

Geometry response to light, using illumination models. Bilnn, phong... how the materials are constructed in paint room ?

 

Will materials be combined and could now create multishaders  ?

 

And what about environmental maps ? or HDRI use ?

 

Until now this release is modifying material components, info about how surface_material reacts to light will be appreciated

 

ty

 

post-10142-0-06307200-1415741573_thumb.j

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(this is based on my experience from the early build I tried...maybe its different now)

 

 

Any information about the lighting system ?

 

pbr shader in 3DC paintroom uses IBL system with cubemaps/panoramas like substance painter and Marmoset TB2

In render room you can still add old lights on top of it if you want...

 

Geometry response to light, using illumination models. Bilnn, phong... how the materials are constructed 

in paint room ?

 

there is no "materials" in paintroom ...it uses one pbr shader...you tweak maps ,you dont create "shaders". 

Exactly like TB2 or substance painter (you can choose 2 more shaders in SPainter...Toon and pixilated)

 

In Unreal 4 there is one basic shading model with 4 modes (unlit,default lit,and 2 SSS shadings)

ex:Unlit is for emissive ,default lit is basic pbr shading (like 3DCoat paintroom pbr shader or TB2 ) 

and the 2 SSS are for skins and waxlike stuff,,,

Andrew already stated SSS is on the way... 

 

 

The basic blinn,phong ,Lambert are not pbr shaders...because they are not energy conservative shaders.

"The standard Lambert diffuse response can emit more light than it receives. The standard Blinn-Phong 

specular model can either lose energy or gain energy depending on the specular power and color. If you 

just add the diffuse and specular responses together, materials can also emit more light than they 

receive."

 

Although it seems tweaked Lambert-Blinn-Phong shading models were made that are "physically accurate" .

Actually ,there seem to be 2 main PBR models; the Lambert-Blinn-Phong BRDF and the Disney BRDF model,the disney model is based on the Torrance-Sparrow microfacet specular model +Lambert model with some tweaks for Diffuse.

 

..anyway this stuff is too complicated for me to understand.Andrew would surely explain better.

You can read here its interesting still;


 

Will materials be combined and could now create multishaders  ?

 

It does not seem like it ,anyway there is no such thing( in Unreal4 for ex) as "multishaders"

In Unreal4 there is layered materials. and basically its just masks that you plug in your nodes to blend between materials layers.

Nothing stop you from making those masks in 3DCoat and load them in Unreal nodes.

 

(again just so to be clear ...in 3DC we'll be painting multichannels/multilayered stamps not making "shaders"

( exactly like substance painter...) 

 

And what about environmental maps ? or HDRI use ?

 

it is the main way to light your models in 3DC pbr. (again like substance painter and TB2)

I tried a few image formats and they all worked very well...

(although I was unable to get full panorama rotations...seemed to be stuck at 180) 

 

Again all this is based on my experience from the early build I tried...evrything is subject to changes.

I guess we'll see in a week or 2... :)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

answer is in previous page :)

Thank you Artman.

At the moment the example library is showing "standard materials" only and a lot of metals and plastic. Very nice indeed, but still standard. A good skin shader is not easy to realise. Even with PBR.

 

I am curious! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Artman.

At the moment the example library is showing "standard materials" only and a lot of metals and plastic. Very nice indeed, but still standard. A good skin shader is not easy to realise. Even with PBR.

 

I am curious! :)

For skin shading...SSS is needed. Andrew already wrote it was planned. :)

(this is what I meant when I wrote "answer is in previous page")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of this discussion seams to be about game engines I'm assuming expert to animation programs like LightWave will still work normally as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×